2. In a decision with major implications for church-affiliated colleges and their employees, the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday unanimously held that the First Amendment precludes the application of federal employment-discrimination laws to religious institutions' personnel decisions involving workers with religious duties.

3. Wednesday's ruling, however, is the first in which the Supreme Court formally recognized the "ministerial exception" as legal doctrine.

4. The Supreme Court majority's opinion, written by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., made clear that the court was applying the ministerial exception only to employment-discrimination disputes.

5. On the question of whether the ministerial exception applied to discrimination lawsuits, however, the justices were emphatic in stating their view that interfering with a church's ability to hire or fire those it regards as ministers violates two clauses of the First Amendment: the free-exercise clause, which, they said, "protects a religious group's right to shape its own faith and mission through its appointments," and the establishment clause, which prohibits government involvement in such religious decisions.

6. Their opinion noted that the First Amendment's authors had chafed against the English Crown's involvement in America's religious matters, and that the Supreme Court had touched upon religious organizations' freedom to choose their own ministers in cases involving attempts by the government to intervene in disputes over church property.

7. The court majority's ruling in the case, Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (No. 10-553), was cheered by the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities, which had submitted an amicus curiae, or "friend of the court," brief urging the justices not to open the door to federal-court involvement in determining which employees of such institutions should be classified as ministerial.

a. "We argued in our brief, and we believe on our campuses, that our faculty are essential to carrying out the religious mission" of religious colleges, said Shapri D. LoMaglio, director of government relations and executive programs for the council... "decision affirms the common-sense proposition that religious schools must be free to choose religion teachers based on religion, without interference from the state."

The suggestion here is that the courts are pushing back against an Obama administration seen to be hostile to religious freedom, specifically in passing a healthcare law that mandates abortion and contraception strategegies inimical to many religious doctrines.

The decision has NO implications for "church-affiliated colleges." The exemption applies only to "personnel decisions involving workers with religious duties." In other words, employees of the church proper, not of other businesses such as a school that a church merely owns.

And this is nothing new, although affirmation by the Supreme Court perhaps is. If so, it only ratifies a distinction that already existed. A church is not bound by anti-discrimination laws in its religious functions proper, but is in any other enterprise owned and operated by the church that is not itself of a religious nature.

Hostile to relgious freedom? You're going to have to give a little more than an unsupported claim.

Click to expand...

"Religious freedom" in some circles is code-speak for the freedom of conservative Christians to suppress the religious freedom of anyone else.

Click to expand...

No, US conservative Christians get tired of everyone else dictating to US and persecuting US. When the schools in California are mandated to teach a course on the cult of islam and then deny Christian teaching in school, that is suppression of Christians rights.

Hostile to relgious freedom? You're going to have to give a little more than an unsupported claim.

Click to expand...

Sure.

1. "The problem was that the Senate version of the bill contained no abortion restrictions. But instead of putting pressure on the Senate Democrats to add the Stupak-Pitts Amendment to their version of the bill, the Obama administration chose instead to place enormous pressure on the House to take this language out of their bill. In the end, nearly all the House Democrats, including the small &#8220;pro-life&#8221; contingent, did as they were told. As a result, there are no restrictions against abortion in the bill itself." Does Obamacare Fund Abortion? Let Us Count the Ways. | Population Research Institute

You're probably unaware of the objections some religious folks have to abortion.

2. &#8220;In the latter half of 2009 &#8211; in what will surely be remembered as a pivotal achievement &#8211; Planned Parenthood worked with its supporters across the nation to help shape and pass the Affordable Care Act,&#8221; wrote PPFA President Cecile Richards and PPFA Chair Valerie McCarthy, in a letter published as part of the organization&#8217;s 2009-2010 annual report.

The women credit their organization&#8217;s &#8220;tireless efforts&#8221; with the passage of a law that &#8220;expands care to millions of women and protects women&#8217;s access to essential reproductive care,&#8221; and promise their supporters &#8220;a promising new era of health care.&#8221;

You're probably unaware of the objections some religious folks have to birth control.

3. The Roman Catholic Diocese of Belleville, Ill., has announced that they will be severing ties with their Social Services agency due to Illinois&#8217; Civil Union Law.
&#8220;When Illinois Catholic Charities agencies said they would refuse to place children with unmarried or same sex couples through their foster care and adoption programs, the battle lines were drawn,&#8221; said the diocese in a statement....&#8220;Catholic adoption agencies are morally constrained by their core religious convictions from providing services to same-sex couples,&#8221;...'Catholic Charities, Ill. Diocese Separate Over New Adoption Rules, Christian News

c. The Obama administration has noted the bigger role that gays and lesbians can play in adoptions. The commissioner for the Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Bryan Samuels, sent a memo to that effect to national child welfare agencies in April.

&#8220;That result is hard to square with the text of the First Amendment itself, which gives special solicitude to the rights of religious organizations,&#8221; Chief Justice Roberts wrote. &#8220;We cannot accept the remarkable view that the religion clauses have nothing to say about a religious organization&#8217;s freedom to select its own ministers.&#8221;
"... Obama&#8217;s DOJ would try to argue that religious orgs enjoy no extra freedom in their hiring practices under the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses. His amazement was obviously shared: I can&#8217;t remember the last time a major decision on a hot-button issue went 9-0....&#8220;The fact is that to many in the Obama administration, as to many in modern legal academia, employment discrimination law is itself pursued with the intensity of, well, a religion. And when someone else&#8217;s religion comes into conflict with theirs &#8212; well, it&#8217;s only human nature for them to want theirs to prevail.&#8221;9-0: Supreme Court finds &#8220;ministerial exception&#8221; to job discrimination laws for religious organizations « Hot Air

Hostile to relgious freedom? You're going to have to give a little more than an unsupported claim.

Click to expand...

Sure.

1. "The problem was that the Senate version of the bill contained no abortion restrictions. But instead of putting pressure on the Senate Democrats to add the Stupak-Pitts Amendment to their version of the bill, the Obama administration chose instead to place enormous pressure on the House to take this language out of their bill. In the end, nearly all the House Democrats, including the small pro-life contingent, did as they were told. As a result, there are no restrictions against abortion in the bill itself." Does Obamacare Fund Abortion? Let Us Count the Ways. | Population Research Institute

You're probably unaware of the objections some religious folks have to abortion.

2. In the latter half of 2009  in what will surely be remembered as a pivotal achievement  Planned Parenthood worked with its supporters across the nation to help shape and pass the Affordable Care Act, wrote PPFA President Cecile Richards and PPFA Chair Valerie McCarthy, in a letter published as part of the organizations 2009-2010 annual report.

The women credit their organizations tireless efforts with the passage of a law that expands care to millions of women and protects womens access to essential reproductive care, and promise their supporters a promising new era of health care.

You're probably unaware of the objections some religious folks have to birth control.

3. The Roman Catholic Diocese of Belleville, Ill., has announced that they will be severing ties with their Social Services agency due to Illinois Civil Union Law.
When Illinois Catholic Charities agencies said they would refuse to place children with unmarried or same sex couples through their foster care and adoption programs, the battle lines were drawn, said the diocese in a statement....Catholic adoption agencies are morally constrained by their core religious convictions from providing services to same-sex couples,...'Catholic Charities, Ill. Diocese Separate Over New Adoption Rules, Christian News

c. The Obama administration has noted the bigger role that gays and lesbians can play in adoptions. The commissioner for the Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Bryan Samuels, sent a memo to that effect to national child welfare agencies in April.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!